PeeWee checking

Discussion of Minnesota Youth Hockey

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Mon Dec 14, 2015 6:52 pm

Do you realize two of the videos you posted show young kids playing soccer? At very elite soccer academies. The other one is a video of a kid executing a single trick that he probably tried thousands of times to perfect it.

What do these videos have anything to do with a decision that was made considering thousands of kids over a broad spectrum of ability levels having to prioritize between focusing on stick handling and passing vs not getting throttled?

Clearly you don't buy into scientific study, choosing to go with what you see with your own eyes in relatively small ample sizes. That's fine. We'll have to just agree to disagree.

jg2112
Posts: 915
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:36 am

Post by jg2112 » Tue Dec 15, 2015 7:05 am

Section 8 guy wrote:Do you realize two of the videos you posted show young kids playing soccer? At very elite soccer academies. The other one is a video of a kid executing a single trick that he probably tried thousands of times to perfect it.

What do these videos have anything to do with a decision that was made considering thousands of kids over a broad spectrum of ability levels having to prioritize between focusing on stick handling and passing vs not getting throttled?

Clearly you don't buy into scientific study, choosing to go with what you see with your own eyes in relatively small ample sizes. That's fine. We'll have to just agree to disagree.
The soccer videos show what the poster said - that these young soccer players have the capability to receive a ball, dribble, pass and also avoid an oncoming defender (who will challenge right to the body in a similar way as hockey).

If 8-year-old soccer players can make these decisions WITH THEIR HEADS UP, why can't hockey players? My son plays soccer, he's 8, he can do it too. That's the point.

DrGaf
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:08 pm

Post by DrGaf » Tue Dec 15, 2015 8:49 am

jg2112 wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote:Do you realize two of the videos you posted show young kids playing soccer? At very elite soccer academies. The other one is a video of a kid executing a single trick that he probably tried thousands of times to perfect it.

What do these videos have anything to do with a decision that was made considering thousands of kids over a broad spectrum of ability levels having to prioritize between focusing on stick handling and passing vs not getting throttled?

Clearly you don't buy into scientific study, choosing to go with what you see with your own eyes in relatively small ample sizes. That's fine. We'll have to just agree to disagree.
The soccer videos show what the poster said - that these young soccer players have the capability to receive a ball, dribble, pass and also avoid an oncoming defender (who will challenge right to the body in a similar way as hockey).

If 8-year-old soccer players can make these decisions WITH THEIR HEADS UP, why can't hockey players? My son plays soccer, he's 8, he can do it too. That's the point.
DISCLAIMER* I played college soccer, and high school hockey. I would like to think I am an informed poster about this particular post I am quoting. Something I have never been able to say.

I would argue that the "foot-eye" coordination is much MUCH easier to master than the "hand-eye" needed for hockey. The first reason being touch. You can feel the ball on your foot, feel the angle, receive and control with less body control than a hockey player trying to do the same thing. You have sticks and skates and gloves to contend with. This does add more layers to the equation compared to a thin layer of fake leather on a soccer ball. As a soccer player I was also able to protect my body with my hands and arms while receiving a pass in traffic. One can not do this in hockey.

These are just two very basic reasons why I don't believe one can compare hockey and soccer's skill sets.
Sorry, fresh out, Don't Really Give Any.

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:19 am

Not to mention there's a very significant difference in the speed of the two games, a soccer player isn't standing on slippery ice, a soccer player is standing on their feet and isn't standing on two 1/16 inch wide blades, a soccer player isn't moving at a very high rate of speed next to what is essentially a brick wall and doesn't have to worry about getting pummeled into the brick wall by someone moving at a very high rate of speed.

If someone has to prioritize between executing a skill and safety they are going to choose safety every time. That either/or decision rarely to never happens on a soccer field. You are completely overlooking the self preservation aspect of the multitasking in hockey.

The easy way to understand it is this.......go watch a high level Bantam AA game in Minnesota. The kids spend a fair amount of time making decisions that will keep them out of harms way. Regularly, throughout the game. Then go watch a high level PeeWee AA game in Minnesota. The kids are focused on executing and making plays and very little else. The amount of time and space they have is night and day. It's very easy to see. Does that mean you should ban checking in Bantams too? No, because checking has to be introduced into the game at some point and the kids that are Bantam aged, as a group, are much better equipped mentally to continue to focus on making plays while being able to focus on avoiding danger, all at the same time.

Sorry folks. There's nothing to see here. Move along!

SCBlueLiner
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm

Post by SCBlueLiner » Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:35 am

Section 8 guy wrote: The easy way to understand it is this.......go watch a high level Bantam AA game in Minnesota. The kids spend a fair amount of time making decisions that will keep them out of harms way. Regularly, throughout the game. Then go watch a high level PeeWee AA game in Minnesota. The kids are focused on executing and making plays and very little else. The amount of time and space they have is night and day. It's very easy to see. Does that mean you should ban checking in Bantams too? No, because checking has to be introduced into the game at some point and the kids that are Bantam aged, as a group, are much better equipped mentally to continue to focus on making plays while being able to focus on avoiding danger, all at the same time.
So what you are saying is we are teaching our Pee Wee aged kids to be oblivious to their surroundings. That creates a dangerous situation when they get to Bantams. I've seen it already, first year Bantams that still think they are in a non-check game that are not aware of what is going on around them and who also put themselves into dangerous positions on the ice. No spacial awareness.

Say what you want about checking from behind and boarding type penalties, I agree that they shouldn't happen, but there is also some responsibility on the part of the player getting checked that they should not put themselves into bad situations and they need to be aware of what is going on around them. Too often that doesn't happen. Off subject a bit but still relevant, I heard Mark Messier talking once about the checking from behind penalty. His take was it shouldn't even be a penalty. Shocking, I know. His position was that the player getting checked shouldn't even be in that position to begin with, that he was taught to never turn your back to open ice and be facing the boards, that the protectionism of the player is taking away their responsibility towards the safety of the game. For lack of better terms, players are reckless out there and put themselves in bad situations, situations they should be taught to avoid. How does taking away checking at PeeWees advance that idea? It doesn't. It ingrains in players for two more years that they don't have to be aware of their surroundings.

Listen, reality is we can debate back and forth on this subject. One side has their position, the other side has their's and neither are really budging. Can we at least agree that there are some valid points on each side?

One thing I can guarantee, checking isn't coming back to Pee Wees, that ship has sailed. I wouldn't be surprised to see it filter into summer hockey though as it has stayed in Choice Leagues. Also wouldn't be surprised to see it crop up in AAU much like full-ice Mites in AAU. If there is a market for it and people think it is the right way it will happen. On the flip side, I read a recent article in USA Hockey magazine about some woman's crusade out East to create a non-check Bantam league. That the kids (meaning her kid) doesn't like the physical side of the game. I got the sense from that article that it has begun, the war to take checking out of Bantams is underway.

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Wed Dec 16, 2015 10:10 pm

SCBlueLiner wrote:So what you are saying is we are teaching our Pee Wee aged kids to be oblivious to their surroundings.
Nope. That wasn't me or what I am saying at all.

And I can totally see both sides of the discussion and have said as much. If you recall, what started the back and forth was the statement that this decision was made so that USA Hockey could generate more money. That's absurd and there is very solid science that supports the decision that was made.

That's all I'm saying. Nothing more, nothing less.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Thu Dec 17, 2015 11:05 am

DrGaf wrote:
jg2112 wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote:Do you realize two of the videos you posted show young kids playing soccer? At very elite soccer academies. The other one is a video of a kid executing a single trick that he probably tried thousands of times to perfect it.

What do these videos have anything to do with a decision that was made considering thousands of kids over a broad spectrum of ability levels having to prioritize between focusing on stick handling and passing vs not getting throttled?

Clearly you don't buy into scientific study, choosing to go with what you see with your own eyes in relatively small ample sizes. That's fine. We'll have to just agree to disagree.
The soccer videos show what the poster said - that these young soccer players have the capability to receive a ball, dribble, pass and also avoid an oncoming defender (who will challenge right to the body in a similar way as hockey).

If 8-year-old soccer players can make these decisions WITH THEIR HEADS UP, why can't hockey players? My son plays soccer, he's 8, he can do it too. That's the point.
DISCLAIMER* I played college soccer, and high school hockey. I would like to think I am an informed poster about this particular post I am quoting. Something I have never been able to say.

I would argue that the "foot-eye" coordination is much MUCH easier to master than the "hand-eye" needed for hockey. The first reason being touch. You can feel the ball on your foot, feel the angle, receive and control with less body control than a hockey player trying to do the same thing. You have sticks and skates and gloves to contend with. This does add more layers to the equation compared to a thin layer of fake leather on a soccer ball. As a soccer player I was also able to protect my body with my hands and arms while receiving a pass in traffic. One can not do this in hockey.

These are just two very basic reasons why I don't believe one can compare hockey and soccer's skill sets.
Well I played D1 college soccer as well (something I've discussed before on here) and also played high school hockey and I'd say that makes me atleast as qualified as you on the subject and I completely disagree. There are all types of ways you become vulnerable in soccer going up for headers against a keeper, receiving a pass with an oncoming defender in your blind spot.... Also, while you add "the layers" you also have those layers as padding and protection, you have no such layers in soccer so your point hurts you as much as helps you.... Honestly some of what you said makes me think you never played soccer at all.... but that's beside the point.... the statement was made that 10 & 11 year olds cannot multitask, these videos along with other pieces of evidence prove that 8 year olds can multitask if taught properly. So if 8 year olds can prove to multitask I am sure 10 and 11 year olds can.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Thu Dec 17, 2015 11:06 am

jg2112 wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote:Do you realize two of the videos you posted show young kids playing soccer? At very elite soccer academies. The other one is a video of a kid executing a single trick that he probably tried thousands of times to perfect it.

What do these videos have anything to do with a decision that was made considering thousands of kids over a broad spectrum of ability levels having to prioritize between focusing on stick handling and passing vs not getting throttled?

Clearly you don't buy into scientific study, choosing to go with what you see with your own eyes in relatively small ample sizes. That's fine. We'll have to just agree to disagree.
The soccer videos show what the poster said - that these young soccer players have the capability to receive a ball, dribble, pass and also avoid an oncoming defender (who will challenge right to the body in a similar way as hockey).

If 8-year-old soccer players can make these decisions WITH THEIR HEADS UP, why can't hockey players? My son plays soccer, he's 8, he can do it too. That's the point.
Bingo!

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Thu Dec 17, 2015 11:07 am

Section 8 guy wrote:Not to mention there's a very significant difference in the speed of the two games, a soccer player isn't standing on slippery ice, a soccer player is standing on their feet and isn't standing on two 1/16 inch wide blades, a soccer player isn't moving at a very high rate of speed next to what is essentially a brick wall and doesn't have to worry about getting pummeled into the brick wall by someone moving at a very high rate of speed.

If someone has to prioritize between executing a skill and safety they are going to choose safety every time. That either/or decision rarely to never happens on a soccer field. You are completely overlooking the self preservation aspect of the multitasking in hockey.

The easy way to understand it is this.......go watch a high level Bantam AA game in Minnesota. The kids spend a fair amount of time making decisions that will keep them out of harms way. Regularly, throughout the game. Then go watch a high level PeeWee AA game in Minnesota. The kids are focused on executing and making plays and very little else. The amount of time and space they have is night and day. It's very easy to see. Does that mean you should ban checking in Bantams too? No, because checking has to be introduced into the game at some point and the kids that are Bantam aged, as a group, are much better equipped mentally to continue to focus on making plays while being able to focus on avoiding danger, all at the same time.

Sorry folks. There's nothing to see here. Move along!
You show you know nothing of the game of soccer in these statements, you know nothing of the speed or time and space of what is happening, sorry you are way off base...... yes time to move along

SECoach
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:29 am

Post by SECoach » Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:02 pm

SCBlueLiner wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote: The easy way to understand it is this.......go watch a high level Bantam AA game in Minnesota. The kids spend a fair amount of time making decisions that will keep them out of harms way. Regularly, throughout the game. Then go watch a high level PeeWee AA game in Minnesota. The kids are focused on executing and making plays and very little else. The amount of time and space they have is night and day. It's very easy to see. Does that mean you should ban checking in Bantams too? No, because checking has to be introduced into the game at some point and the kids that are Bantam aged, as a group, are much better equipped mentally to continue to focus on making plays while being able to focus on avoiding danger, all at the same time.
So what you are saying is we are teaching our Pee Wee aged kids to be oblivious to their surroundings. That creates a dangerous situation when they get to Bantams. I've seen it already, first year Bantams that still think they are in a non-check game that are not aware of what is going on around them and who also put themselves into dangerous positions on the ice. No spacial awareness.

Say what you want about checking from behind and boarding type penalties, I agree that they shouldn't happen, but there is also some responsibility on the part of the player getting checked that they should not put themselves into bad situations and they need to be aware of what is going on around them. Too often that doesn't happen. Off subject a bit but still relevant, I heard Mark Messier talking once about the checking from behind penalty. His take was it shouldn't even be a penalty. Shocking, I know. His position was that the player getting checked shouldn't even be in that position to begin with, that he was taught to never turn your back to open ice and be facing the boards, that the protectionism of the player is taking away their responsibility towards the safety of the game. For lack of better terms, players are reckless out there and put themselves in bad situations, situations they should be taught to avoid. How does taking away checking at PeeWees advance that idea? It doesn't. It ingrains in players for two more years that they don't have to be aware of their surroundings.

Listen, reality is we can debate back and forth on this subject. One side has their position, the other side has their's and neither are really budging. Can we at least agree that there are some valid points on each side?

One thing I can guarantee, checking isn't coming back to Pee Wees, that ship has sailed. I wouldn't be surprised to see it filter into summer hockey though as it has stayed in Choice Leagues. Also wouldn't be surprised to see it crop up in AAU much like full-ice Mites in AAU. If there is a market for it and people think it is the right way it will happen. On the flip side, I read a recent article in USA Hockey magazine about some woman's crusade out East to create a non-check Bantam league. That the kids (meaning her kid) doesn't like the physical side of the game. I got the sense from that article that it has begun, the war to take checking out of Bantams is underway.
It's not a matter of whether 12 year olds can or cannot multi-task. It's about how they can maximize the physiological development of their brain and transmitters during the time that part of their neurological system is most open to it. It's about making them BETTER multi-taskers, than they might have been under the old rules and guidelines.

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Thu Dec 17, 2015 8:40 pm

JSR wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote:Not to mention there's a very significant difference in the speed of the two games, a soccer player isn't standing on slippery ice, a soccer player is standing on their feet and isn't standing on two 1/16 inch wide blades, a soccer player isn't moving at a very high rate of speed next to what is essentially a brick wall and doesn't have to worry about getting pummeled into the brick wall by someone moving at a very high rate of speed.

If someone has to prioritize between executing a skill and safety they are going to choose safety every time. That either/or decision rarely to never happens on a soccer field. You are completely overlooking the self preservation aspect of the multitasking in hockey.

The easy way to understand it is this.......go watch a high level Bantam AA game in Minnesota. The kids spend a fair amount of time making decisions that will keep them out of harms way. Regularly, throughout the game. Then go watch a high level PeeWee AA game in Minnesota. The kids are focused on executing and making plays and very little else. The amount of time and space they have is night and day. It's very easy to see. Does that mean you should ban checking in Bantams too? No, because checking has to be introduced into the game at some point and the kids that are Bantam aged, as a group, are much better equipped mentally to continue to focus on making plays while being able to focus on avoiding danger, all at the same time.

Sorry folks. There's nothing to see here. Move along!
You show you know nothing of the game of soccer in these statements, you know nothing of the speed or time and space of what is happening, sorry you are way off base...... yes time to move along
It's funny you should say that because I actually played soccer at the college level as well. I never felt I was in an unsafe position on a soccer field. Not once. Could I have been injured playing soccer? Yes. Did I ever play the game giving an ounce of thought to injury or fear as I played? No. That's not true with many or even most/all hockey players, particularly as they first begin checking.

Again, my only point here is this isn't about the money. That's ridiculous.

Clearly you believe what you see with your own eyes. That's fine. Some of us believe in the scientific studies. Thats fine too. Time to move on.

JSR
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:26 pm

Post by JSR » Wed Dec 23, 2015 1:05 pm

Section 8 guy wrote:
JSR wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote:Not to mention there's a very significant difference in the speed of the two games, a soccer player isn't standing on slippery ice, a soccer player is standing on their feet and isn't standing on two 1/16 inch wide blades, a soccer player isn't moving at a very high rate of speed next to what is essentially a brick wall and doesn't have to worry about getting pummeled into the brick wall by someone moving at a very high rate of speed.

If someone has to prioritize between executing a skill and safety they are going to choose safety every time. That either/or decision rarely to never happens on a soccer field. You are completely overlooking the self preservation aspect of the multitasking in hockey.

The easy way to understand it is this.......go watch a high level Bantam AA game in Minnesota. The kids spend a fair amount of time making decisions that will keep them out of harms way. Regularly, throughout the game. Then go watch a high level PeeWee AA game in Minnesota. The kids are focused on executing and making plays and very little else. The amount of time and space they have is night and day. It's very easy to see. Does that mean you should ban checking in Bantams too? No, because checking has to be introduced into the game at some point and the kids that are Bantam aged, as a group, are much better equipped mentally to continue to focus on making plays while being able to focus on avoiding danger, all at the same time.

Sorry folks. There's nothing to see here. Move along!
You show you know nothing of the game of soccer in these statements, you know nothing of the speed or time and space of what is happening, sorry you are way off base...... yes time to move along
It's funny you should say that because I actually played soccer at the college level as well. I never felt I was in an unsafe position on a soccer field. Not once. Could I have been injured playing soccer? Yes. Did I ever play the game giving an ounce of thought to injury or fear as I played? No. That's not true with many or even most/all hockey players, particularly as they first begin checking.

Again, my only point here is this isn't about the money. That's ridiculous.

Clearly you believe what you see with your own eyes. That's fine. Some of us believe in the scientific studies. Thats fine too. Time to move on.
Yea you said that about playing college soccer already and I made my statement knowing that..... Maybe if you read the whole post you see where I played D1 college soccer and to say I didn't have some fear going for a header in the box or other areas of the field would be a lie. I did it anyway same way hockey players do it anyway but to say there are no danger areas or places of "fear" in soccer is plain wrong...

Also, there were no scientific studies, there was no MAYO study, you've already been shown you are wrong about that and made it up. The study you and the folks at USA hockey and Hockey Canada reference were not "scientific" they were also correlary and observational studies, with about as much merit and science behind them as anyone else's opinion on this board. You are trusting a myth, not science.

zooomx
Posts: 463
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:34 pm

that't the sound of a man beating on a dead horse

Post by zooomx » Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:47 pm

thunk.... thunk... thunk... thunk... thunk... thunk... thunk... thunk... thunk...

At first i wanted to argue the point, but then I thought it would be like debating Donald Trump.

The horse is beaten to death. The rule in not changing. Get over it. :roll:

Post Reply